I don’t think that required a ban, but they are right in saying “we can’t see everything” when they say that just showing posts that made it to the top that meet your criteria doesn’t mean your post shouldn’t have been deleted.
It’d be easy to ruin a subreddit’s goals by just overwhelming the mods with rule-breaking content until it’s impossible to remove all of it, because then you’d be bound to have at least one example where rules were broken but post is popular.
I mean, I’d argue depending on your audience, “People who meme mental illnesses are just making a clownshow out of mental illnesses” is probably a very popular opinion. like you’d have to go to 4ch probably to get really angry crowds.
If the mods admit that they would have removed the posts had they seen them (implied by the “we can’t see everything” response) - yet they’re not open to being alerted to problem posts (implied by the “checkmate” sass) - how can they fairly expect users not to be frustrated by the unequal application of the rules?
The correct mod response here would have been “we understand you disagree, but we don’t feel the posts you linked violate the rules” or “you’re right, we missed those too,” not “we didn’t see those but also we’re banning you for telling us about them.”
They breed the hostile environment they complain so much about, and the cycle continues.
I don’t think that required a ban, but they are right in saying “we can’t see everything” when they say that just showing posts that made it to the top that meet your criteria doesn’t mean your post shouldn’t have been deleted.
It’d be easy to ruin a subreddit’s goals by just overwhelming the mods with rule-breaking content until it’s impossible to remove all of it, because then you’d be bound to have at least one example where rules were broken but post is popular.
I mean, I’d argue depending on your audience, “People who meme mental illnesses are just making a clownshow out of mental illnesses” is probably a very popular opinion. like you’d have to go to 4ch probably to get really angry crowds.
If the mods admit that they would have removed the posts had they seen them (implied by the “we can’t see everything” response) - yet they’re not open to being alerted to problem posts (implied by the “checkmate” sass) - how can they fairly expect users not to be frustrated by the unequal application of the rules?
The correct mod response here would have been “we understand you disagree, but we don’t feel the posts you linked violate the rules” or “you’re right, we missed those too,” not “we didn’t see those but also we’re banning you for telling us about them.”
They breed the hostile environment they complain so much about, and the cycle continues.
deleted by creator